OC saying that , even this dual core/quad thread intel soc doesn't really cut it for me, i cant even remember the last dual core anything i bought, even with intel in 2014/15 even if the OEM's are buying loads of intel soc for the next mobile/static blitz this holiday season , im not interested in buying as an end consumer unless its got quad core, and the said AVX2+ and Quick Sync...Reply

<blockquote>no amd soc meets these soc as AVX2 and Intel® Quick Sync Video are pretty much a base requirement in 2014/15 for high quality video playback and real time video capture/streaming.</blockquote>

BMNify, I'm not arguing against your love for AVX2 and Quick Sync. On the other hand, you've overlooked some details. Haswell is not an SoC. That honor belongs to the Saltwell based chips. Also, both AMD and nVidia have equivalents to Quick Sync, being VCE and NVENC respectively.Reply

But AVX2 as base requirement? lol.. there are practically no programs for AVX2 because Intel decided to leave it out 70+% of all sold devices (Celerons, Pentiums). And QuickSync as "high quiality"? Have you even seen what blurry shit it makes?Reply

That's just nonsense. You certainly don't need quicksync for even high-end video playback - a single CPU tends to be enough (and you've got more than one, right?). I suspect AMD has a "iGPU" accelerated playback mode too. Though again, you don't need it (and the quality of quicksync is inferior to that of software decoders/encoders).

AVX2 is neat, but similar truly not a requirement.

I recently got smoothvideo to run... smoothly on an ancient Q6600 with an ancient 9600GT card. I would certainly recommend more, but note: you really don't need quicksync.Reply

I was going to say "wait for Carrizo", but that will likely be a 28nm part (at this rate), so I don't think they'll get their power/heat issues resolved. I like these little systems, but they are all just too weak in GPU power to justify moving away from my current setups.Reply

You guys are forgetting that the NUC and related SFF PCs all use mobile chips. If you want a full Kaveri with 512 shaders, the FX-7600P has a 35W TDP. For something with similar TDP to the i5 U, there's the FX-7500 at 19W, although that only has 384 shaders.Reply

Any chance that those Benchmarks find their way into Bench?I'd really appreciate some perspective of just how a dual core i5 fits into the full picture or how it compares to the 10W 4C/4T J1900 CPUs formerly known as Bay Trail, which also come with 9-19VDC adapters and are available as mini-ITX boards.With the piddly cooling system being the Achilles heel of these SFFs, some noise testing would be appreciated.Reply

A Mac Mini is the same price... why do Mini's never make the "compared to" list? You can run MS & Linux as well as OSX on a Mini.... At the risk of being called a Fanboy (they're all JUST MACHINES). IMHO, I'd still opt for a MiniReply

The mini is lacking the newest Haswell chip, which should hopefully come soon. Should be an even better value proposition.

But people also didn't take into account that it comes with an OS, whereas the Zotac does not.

We often use Mac Minis for light servers and compile machines, as you can fit a whole bunch of them in a small space and span virtual screens with software. They're not amazing but they're solid and dependable and get the job done.Reply

I used to use the AppleTax word myself. I used to build my own machines. Having two minis running 24x7 , the new one for 3 years straight, the old one 4 years. Thus, I'm over both of those habits. If you compare them side by side, spec by spec, you may see the so-called AppleTax is minimal at best. ....OBTW, it's just a machine, not a religion. Both of mine are buried in the behind all my other AV gear. I rarely touch them, they just work.Reply

You are absolutely right. The mac mini was the first to create this form factor in 2005, It was Apple's strategy to sell frequency constrained mobile parts as silent and eco-friendly. From tablets, ultrabooks to NUCs it's all just uninspired imitation.Buying a laptop is also always the better choice (same parts after all), which is why the minis aren't all that popular in the apple camp either. Reply

Thing is laptops can make great desktops or servers, but not vice versa. They don't look to shabby on the desk, the shelf or the living room either, and they come with an uninterruptable power supply build in. When everyone is on an electronic bugdet with almost omnipotent devices like smartphones, PCs, consoles all of which require replacement in perpetuity, is there room for a limited purpose blue skull, with a 281 $ Intel dual core?

There is a sensible TDP limit for eco-friendly PCs, but it ain't 15 W. There is also no pupose to cramming a stationarry PC into a little box, beyond "neat". "Neat" doesn't sell, either, or help anyone to improve their social status.Reply

Laptops aren't designed for 24/7 usage, so no, they aren't great servers. Neither are they particularly expandable. Getting a few TB of storage into a laptop isn't cheap or easy. Neither is getting lots of RAM.As for desktops, sure, if you don't mind the premium. If you think the formfactor and screen come without a price, well...Lastly, laptops typically make more noise running full-tilt, or else they throttle. While this system probably doesn't run completely silent either, at least you don't pay the full laptop premium. The footprint is also smaller than a laptop (because laptops are low and wide, even when the volume is identical).Reply

We deployed a number of the D54250WYKH units, and although the i5-4250U is not in the same league as the i7-4770R of the Brix, for standard office apps, they work well enough.

Apart from the usual "I like it but could I have a faster one" request, the wish-list feature that seemed to get the most requests was a QI charger built into the lid, so you can place your phone on the computer to re-charge - we have them sitting on the desk.

It seems that Intel are planning this for the next iteration, and personally, I can't see that working with a sphere.Reply

It's nice to see something a little different, but I can't help but feel like they could have utilised the space better. For example, an internal PSU that occupies some of the extra internal space. I dunno, I just think it'd be more pleasing to have a unit that has nothing coming out of it besides a power cable and monitor cable, a brick kind of spoils that IMO. It also seems like it could have been a prime candidate for a passively cooled case, due to the sheer amount of surface area compared to the more compact, flat NUC systems.Reply